Each potential coalition of councils has essentially had to outsource the work around amalgamation to a consultancy because of a lack of internal capacity and capability, write Andy Asquith, Adjunct Research Fellow, University of Western Australia and Jeff McNeill, Honorary Research Associate at Massey University.
We’re writing this after most of our councils have just frantically finalised their submissions for local government review. You will need little reminding that after a late-night game of truth or dare, Ministers Bishop and Watts came up with the idea of giving local government a very short period in which to propose suggestions for the biggest local government shake-up since 1989.
There was no need for revisiting the considered rigmarole which preceded the Auckland Council creation in 2010. Much better to let councils decide themselves. Localism really in action some may say! Well, not really.
The outcome, irrespective of whatever shape it takes, will result in a smaller number of bigger councils, which will be much less local and much more regional in nature. There are just some teeny-weeny problems here though – not least around localism – let alone local self-governance and self-determination.
The announcement itself was all about efficiency and effectiveness. Nowhere did Bishop or Watts refer to piddling issues such as ‘democracy’, ‘accountability’ or ‘citizen engagement’ – it was about the former neo-liberal juggernauts.
Since the election of the National-New Zealand First-ACT coalition in 2023, local councils have seemingly been bombarded with initiatives over and above the traditional cost shifting we associate with central government – irrespective of which main party is running the show. Hence, even before the current government announced the urgent reorganisation move, councils were strapped for resources – both human and financial – with little wiggle room.
A brief look at a selection of regional newspapers from around the country inadvertently acknowledges the end result of decades of hollowing out capability from our public sector institutions. Specifically, we are now seeing a frightening lack of internal capacity within the local government sector.
In news story after news story announcing the various reports on amalgamation plans, we see a worrying thread. Each potential coalition of councils has essentially had to outsource the work around amalgamation to a consultancy because of a lack of internal capacity and capability.
Unwittingly – or dare we beg to suggest wittingly – the reorganisation has simply delivered a whole raft of work to the management consultancy industry in a single move. Not only that, but the nationwide scope of the work meant there was enough work for everyone!
Indeed, you may even argue that given the scale and scope of the Watts/Bishop enterprise, the management consultancy industry itself doesn’t have the capacity to tackle the sudden increase in workload. It may even be suggested that given this situation, market forces will intervene, with those able to engage ‘A’ list consultants producing (in theory) more pleasing solutions for the Ministers than those having to do with ‘C’ list consultants.
Now, if anyone has been watching events over in Australia around the management consultancy industry, you’ll know the reputation of the sector is less whiter than white – more blacker than black.
When the amalgamation proposals are accepted by the Department of Internal Affairs, they will need to be implemented. Who better to operationalise this than the very architects who drew them up in the first place – the management consultancies!
The more the consultancies embed themselves into the newly created ‘super’ councils, the more they will be needed. The image of a drug dealer and the addicted user springs to mind. We’ll do the initial work as a loss leader because we know that once we’re inside, it’ll be near impossible to get us out. This follows the well-tried and well-used management consultancy ‘land and expand’ business model.
We can therefore see that the amalgamation process does indeed have a very clear group of winners. It is not local communities, local democracy, representation, voice, choice or self-determination. It is the management consultancies who have now been set off on a path of untold riches – all on the back of your rates. Perhaps one day we may stop misleadingly talking about fat-cat bureaucrats, but rather fat-cat management consultants?